Human Resources Research Organization, Alexandria, Virginia, USA.
Independent, Roseville, Minnesota, USA.
Mil Psychol. 2023 Jul-Aug;35(4):308-320. doi: 10.1080/08995605.2022.2050165. Epub 2022 May 31.
Criterion measures vary greatly in terms of their psychometric quality and ease of use. This paper serves two purposes. First, it provides a general summary of different approaches to criterion measurement in a military context. Second, it provides an extensive review of 16 specific types of criterion measurement methods (e.g., job performance rating scales, self-report questionnaires, job knowledge tests) on nine psychometric and ease-of-use evaluation factors. Eight criterion measurement experts read a summary of extant research and made ratings to evaluate each measurement method on the evaluation factors. Rater intra-class correlations (ICCs) were high, ranging from .75 to .95 across the evaluation dimensions with a median of .91. Data showed a quality-feasibility tradeoff, where criterion data that are easy to obtain often have technical flaws. Recommendations for military services and future directions in criterion measurement (e.g., applications of machine learning) are discussed.
标准测量方法在心理计量学质量和易用性方面差异很大。本文有两个目的。首先,它提供了一个军事背景下标准测量的不同方法的一般总结。其次,它对 16 种特定类型的标准测量方法(例如,工作绩效评定量表、自我报告问卷、工作知识测试)进行了广泛的回顾,涉及九个心理计量学和易用性评估因素。八位标准测量专家阅读了现有研究的摘要,并对每个评估因素的测量方法进行了评分。评分者组内相关系数(ICC)较高,在评估维度上的范围从.75 到.95,中位数为.91。数据显示了质量-可行性的权衡,即易于获得的标准数据通常存在技术缺陷。讨论了对军事部门的建议和标准测量的未来方向(例如,机器学习的应用)。